Water security

A 2012 map of the world showing in red the places with least water security.

Water security has been defined as "the reliable availability of an acceptable quantity and quality of water for health, livelihoods and production, coupled with an acceptable level of water-related risks."[1] Sustainable development will not be achieved without a water secure world. A water secure world integrates a concern for the intrinsic value of water with a concern for its use for human survival and well-being. A water secure world harnesses water's productive power and minimises its destructive force. Water security also means addressing environmental protection and the negative effects of poor management. It is also concerned with ending fragmented responsibility for water and integrating water resources management across all sectors – finance, planning, agriculture, energy, tourism, industry, education and health. A water secure world reduces poverty, advances education, and increases living standards. It is a world where there is an improved quality of life for all, especially for the most vulnerable—usually women and children—who benefit most from good water governance.[2]

According to the Pacific Institute "While regional impacts will vary, global climate change will potentially alter agricultural productivity, freshwater availability and quality, access to vital minerals, coastal and island flooding, and more. Among the consequences of these impacts will be challenges to political relationships, realignment of energy markets and regional economies, and threats to security".[3]

It impacts regions, states and countries. Tensions exist between upstream and downstream users of water within individual jurisdictions.[4]

During history there has been much conflict over use of water from rivers such as the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers.[5] Another highly politicized example is Israel's control of water resources in the Levant region since its creation,[6] where Israel securing its water resources was one of several drivers for the 1967 Six Day War.

Water security is sometimes sought by implementing water desalination, pipelines between sources and users, water licences with different security levels and war.

Water allocation between competing users is increasingly determined by application of market-based pricing for either water licenses or actual water.[7]

Water, in absolute terms, is not in short supply planet-wide. But, according to the United Nations water organization, UN-Water, the total usable freshwater supply for ecosystems and humans is only about 200,000 km3 of water – less than one percent (<1%) of all freshwater resources. And, water use has been growing at more than twice the rate of the population increase in the last century. Specifically, water withdrawals are predicted to increase by 50 percent by 2025 in developing countries, and 18 per cent in developed countries. By 2025, 800 million people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity, and two-thirds of the world population could be under stress conditions.[8]

According to Nature (2010), about 80% of the world's population (5.6 billion in 2011) live in areas with threats to water security. The water security is a shared threat to human and nature and it is pandemic. Human water-management strategies can be detrimental to wildlife, such as migrating fish. Regions with intensive agriculture and dense populations, such as the US and Europe, have a high threat of water security. Water is increasingly being used as a weapon in conflict.[9] Water insecurity is always accompanied by one or more issues such as poverty, war and conflict, low women’s development and environmental degradation.[10] Researchers estimate that during 2010-2015, ca US$800 billion will be required to cover the annual global investment in water infrastructure. Good management of water resources can jointly manage biodiversity protection and human water security. Preserving flood plains rather than constructing flood-control reservoirs would provide a cost-effective way to control floods while protecting the biodiversity of wildlife that occupies such areas.[11]

Lawrence Smith, the president of the population institute, asserts that although an overwhelming majority of the planet is composed of water, 97% of this water is constituted of saltwater; the fresh water used to sustain humans is only 3% of the total amount of water on Earth.[12] Therefore, Smith believes that the competition for water in an overpopulated world would pose a major threat to human stability,[12] even going so far as to postulate apocalyptic world wars being fought over the control of thinning ice sheets and nearly desiccated reservoirs.[12] Nevertheless, 2 billion people have supposedly gained access to a safe water source since 1990 who may have earlier lacked it.[13] The proportion of people in developing countries with access to safe water is calculated to have improved from 30 percent in 1970[14] to 71 percent in 1990, 79 percent in 2000 and 84 percent in 2004, parallel with rising population. This trend is projected to continue.[13]

The Earth has a limited though renewable supply of fresh water, stored in aquifers, surface waters and the atmosphere. Oceans are a good source of usable water, but the amount of energy needed to convert saline water to potable water is prohibitive with conventional approaches, explaining why only a very small fraction of the world's water supply is derived from desalination.[15] However, modern technologies, such as the Seawater Greenhouse, use solar energy to desalinate seawater for agriculture and drinking uses in an extremely cost-effective manner.

Blue Peace is a method which seeks to transforms trans-boundary water issues into instruments for cooperation. This unique approach to turn tensions around water into opportunities for socio-economic development was developed by Strategic Foresight Group in partnership with the Governments of Switzerland and Sweden.

“The Blue Peace is an innovative approach to engage political leaders, diplomats and populations in harnessing and managing collaborative solutions for sustainable water management.” – Foreign Minister Didier Burkhalter of Swirtzerland, speaking at the UN General Assembly

In 2007 Bermuda signed a contract to purchase a desalination plant [27]

The largest desalination plant in the United States is the one at Tampa Bay, Florida, which began desalinizing 25 million gallons (95000 m³) of water per day in December 2007.[28] In the United States, the cost of desalination is $3.06 for 1,000 gallons, or 81 cents per cubic meter.[29] In the United States, California, Arizona, Texas, and Florida use desalination for a very small part of their water supply.[30][31][32]

After being desalinized at Jubail, Saudi Arabia, water is pumped 200 miles (320 km) inland though a pipeline to the capital city of Riyadh.[33]

A January 17, 2008, article in the Wall Street Journal states, "World-wide, 13,080 desalination plants produce more than 12 billion gallons of water a day, according to the International Desalination Association." [34]

The world's largest desalination plant is the Jebel Ali Desalination Plant (Phase 2) in the United Arab Emirates. It is a dual-purpose facility that uses multi-stage flash distillation and is capable of producing 300 million cubic meters of water per year.[35]

A typical aircraft carrier in the U.S. military uses nuclear power to desalinize 400,000 US gallons (1,500,000 L) of water per day.[36]

While desalinizing 1,000 US gallons (3,800 L) of water can cost as much as $3, the same amount of bottled water costs $7,945.[37]

However, given the energy intensive nature of desalination, with associated economic and environmental costs, desalination is generally considered a last resort after water conservation. But this is changing as prices continue to fall.

According to MSNBC, a report by Lux Research estimated that the worldwide desalinated water supply will triple between 2008 and 2020.[38]

However, not everyone is convinced that desalination is or will be economically viable or environmentally sustainable for the foreseeable future. Debbie Cook, the former mayor of Huntington Beach, California, has been a frequent critic of desalination proposals ever since she was appointed as a member of the California Desalination Task Force. Cook claims that in addition to being energy intensive, desalination schemes are very costly—often much more costly than desalination proponents claim. In her writing on the subject, Cook points to a long list of projects that have stalled or been aborted for financial or other reasons, and suggests that water-stressed regions would do better to focus on conservation or other water supply solutions than to invest in desalination plants.[39]